Kristi Noem Kills Dog

[baddog]

I’m no expert, but to my knowledge, it is common practice to execute a dog that has gotten a taste of chicken. I’m a dog lover and have no problem with her action. Thoughts?

Defiant Kristi Noem defends killing farm pup amid criticism from Dems, GOP

 

This is the hidden content, please

• Sign In
• or
• Sign Up

 

Explore the Fox News apps that are right for you at

This is the hidden content, please

• Sign In
• or
• Sign Up

[5GallonBucket]

I have no problem with what she did.

just like with humans when they turn bad gotta pay the consequences 

liberals: save a dog but kill a baby. 

 

[bullets13]

It's common knowledge that this sort of thing happens on ranches, out in the country, etc.  I'd be willing to bet that a good number of people who participate in this forum have had to do something similar. That said, she's an absolute moron for putting it in a book, period.  The act of killing the dog can be justified, especially for those of us familiar with how life on a ranch/farm works,  but publicizing it is inexcusable for someone in her position.  I honestly have no clue what she was thinking.  60% percent of the country already doesn't like trump, and now his most likely running mate has a major controversy over killing a dog.  Pure stupidity.

[Reagan]

She put this in her book to show she's not afraid of making the tough decisions.  

[SmashMouth]

1 hour ago, bullets13 said:

60% percent of the country already doesn't like trump, and now his most likely running mate has a major controversy over killing a dog.  Pure stupidity.

Hard to refute that statement. 

[baddog]

1 hour ago, bullets13 said:

It's common knowledge that this sort of thing happens on ranches, out in the country, etc.  I'd be willing to bet that a good number of people who participate in this forum have had to do something similar. That said, she's an absolute moron for putting it in a book, period.  The act of killing the dog can be justified, especially for those of us familiar with how life on a ranch/farm works,  but publicizing it is inexcusable for someone in her position.  I honestly have no clue what she was thinking.  60% percent of the country already doesn't like trump, and now his most likely running mate has a major controversy over killing a dog.  Pure stupidity.

I don’t know bullets. In this day and age I think it best to publicize a potential skeleton in your closet rather than have it discovered down the road where it would be perceived as “hiding” a fact. This would only be fuel for the uninformed. 

[bullets13]

53 minutes ago, baddog said:

I don’t know bullets. In this day and age I think it best to publicize a potential skeleton in your closet rather than have it discovered down the road where it would be perceived as “hiding” a fact. This would only be fuel for the uninformed. 

In certain things I’d agree, but I don’t think anyone would ever find out about this unless she told someone.  If it was going to come out the dems would’ve drug it up the second her name started being mentioned as VP.  And like I said, growing up the way I did, I know that it’s necessary sometimes, and if hers was eating chickens and biting people, it needed to go.  I don’t have an issue with it, but it’s the sort of thing that’s gonna upset pretty much everyone who didn’t grow up with dogs on a farm or ranch.  

[bullets13]

59 minutes ago, Reagan said:

She put this in her book to show she's not afraid of making the tough decisions.  

A better decision would’ve been finding a better example of that and leaving it out of her book.  I have no issue with someone putting down a bird killer, but 3/4 of the country doesn’t understand anything about that, and it sounds horrible to them.  

[LumRaiderFan]

1 hour ago, Reagan said:

She put this in her book to show she's not afraid of making the tough decisions.  

I like the approach, here it is, if you don’t like it don’t vote for me, it’s refreshing to see the Ronald Reagan approach.

Not every statement needs to be based on a perceived reaction from folks.

Don’t think for a minute democrats didn’t have this knowledge, just not the right time to use it, remember Romney and the dog carrier, they knew.

 

[bullets13]

48 minutes ago, LumRaiderFan said:

I like the approach, here it is, if you don’t like it don’t vote for me, it’s refreshing to see the Ronald Reagan approach.

Not every statement needs to be based on a perceived reaction from folks.

Don’t think for a minute democrats didn’t have this knowledge, just not the right time to use it, remember Romney and the dog carrier, they knew.

 

They don’t, and they won’t.  May not be an issue in South Dakota, but certainly is on the national stage.  Even my mother in law, who strictly watches OAN and thinks Trump is a great guy who’s never committed a crime in his life is completely disgusted by this.  I know about bad dogs, and don’t have an issue with what she did,  and I’m sure most of us on here agree.  But as is often this case, it’s not going to be our opinions that decide this election.  I thought she might be a valuable running mate that could bring in the female vote, but I’m hoping Trump has the sense to stay away from her now.  

[bullets13]

For what it’s worth, polling after this came out show her with an 81% disapproval rating.  Only 21% of republicans said she’d be a good choice for veep, and only 28% of self-identified “very conservative” voters said she’s a good option.  Bragging about killing a dog apparently resonates poorly across political affiliations.  

[baddog]

14 minutes ago, bullets13 said:

For what it’s worth, polling after this came out show her with an 81% disapproval rating.  Only 21% of republicans said she’d be a good choice for veep, and only 28% of self-identified “very conservative” voters said she’s a good option.  Bragging about killing a dog apparently resonates poorly across political affiliations.  

Well, the ones who are upset by this are the same ones who can’t define a woman. There was another woman who everybody came down on for hunting. We are a nation of the offended.  

[LumRaiderFan]

56 minutes ago, bullets13 said:

For what it’s worth, polling after this came out show her with an 81% disapproval rating.  Only 21% of republicans said she’d be a good choice for veep, and only 28% of self-identified “very conservative” voters said she’s a good option.  Bragging about killing a dog apparently resonates poorly across political affiliations.  

There you go again, bragging?  smh

I think your poll numbers are bogus, to poll this soon obviously had a purpose, surely you see that.

 I guess she decided to be honest, I thought that’s what we want in politicians, I guess not.

She should have said she had a full term abortion, that would have gone over much better than putting down a bad dog.

[bullets13]

1 minute ago, LumRaiderFan said:

There you go again, bragging?  smh

I think your poll numbers are bogus, to poll this soon obviously had a purpose, surely you see that.

 I guess she decided to be honest, I thought that’s what we want in politicians, I guess not.

She should have said she had a full term abortion, that would have gone over much better than putting down a bad dog.

She didn’t need to be honest, she needed to leave it out of her book.  And you can say what you want about the poll, but the majority of folks didn’t grow up dealing with dogs and livestock, and you’re never going to make them understand.  I used the term bragging because she’s saying she told the story to show she can “make tough decisions.”  So apparently she thinks it’s a good thing she did, and she wanted others to know about it.  But most people don’t agree. There are plenty of republicans attacking her over this, so you can’t just blame it on the over sensitive left.  

[LumRaiderFan]

1 hour ago, bullets13 said:

They don’t, and they won’t.  May not be an issue in South Dakota, but certainly is on the national stage.  Even my mother in law, who strictly watches OAN and thinks Trump is a great guy who’s never committed a crime in his life is completely disgusted by this.  I know about bad dogs, and don’t have an issue with what she did,  and I’m sure most of us on here agree.  But as is often this case, it’s not going to be our opinions that decide this election.  I thought she might be a valuable running mate that could bring in the female vote, but I’m hoping Trump has the sense to stay away from her now.  

She’ll still bring in the Republican women voters, they vote on economic issues, not simply for being a woman like democrats.

You have to earn their vote with results, unlike the democrats.

[LumRaiderFan]

6 minutes ago, bullets13 said:

She didn’t need to be honest, she needed to leave it out of her book.  And you can say what you want about the poll, but the majority of folks didn’t grow up dealing with dogs and livestock, and you’re never going to make them understand.  I used the term bragging because she’s saying she told the story to show she can “make tough decisions.”  So apparently she thinks it’s a good thing she did, and she wanted others to know about it.  But most people don’t agree. There are plenty of republicans attacking her over this, so you can’t just blame it on the over sensitive left.  

I’m not blaming anyone, I’m simply saying I’m ok with it.

[bullets13]

53 minutes ago, baddog said:

Well, the ones who are upset by this are the same ones who can’t define a woman. There was another woman who everybody came down on for hunting. We are a nation of the offended.  

Lots of republicans are giving her hell over this.  An overwhelming majority of moderates aren’t going to like it, and obviously the over offended left hates it.  She’s tanked her shot at VP, whoever you want to blame.  I stated in an early post that I don’t have an issue with some dogs being taken out if they’re biting and killing animals.  But it’s not your opinion or mine that is going to matter on this one.  

[LumRaiderFan]

1 minute ago, bullets13 said:

Lots of republicans are giving her hell over this.  An overwhelming majority of moderates aren’t going to like it, and obviously the over offended left hates it.  She’s tanked her shot at VP, whoever you want to blame.  I stated in an early post that I don’t have an issue with some dogs being taken out if they’re biting and killing animals.  But it’s not your opinion or mine that is going to matter on this one.  

If only she was as politically savvy as you.

🙂

[bullets13]

1 minute ago, LumRaiderFan said:

I’m nothing blaming anyone, I’m simply saying I’m ok with it.

I honestly don’t have an issue with it.  I grew up around livestock.  We had a neighbor lose nearly 30 animals in a 3-week period before they caught the dogs doing it. Those dogs needed to die.  I was there when my uncle killed a dog that was eating his chickens… didn’t bother me. If one of my dogs ever bites one of my kids it’ll be dead.  Immediately.  But some things are better left unsaid, and probably 90% of the country loves dogs, with only a small fraction of them being able to relate to why she did what she did.  

[bullets13]

2 minutes ago, LumRaiderFan said:

If only she was as politically savvy as you.

🙂

Appreciate the confidence.  Why don’t we see how this works out for her.  Going great so far.  She MIGHT be able to get re-elected in South Dakota next election, but if a good candidate runs against her in the Republican primaries she may be in trouble.  I don’t think there’s a chance in hades she gets the VP nomination, and if for some reason Trump is dumb enough to give it to her, his chances of winning are probably over.  On a positive note, maybe DeSantis gets it now?  If they win and do a decent job then we’d have a VP ready to run for president in four years with a good shot of winning.  

[LumRaiderFan]

7 minutes ago, bullets13 said:

Appreciate the confidence.  Why don’t we see how this works out for her.  Going great so far 😉

You won’t get an argument from me that this won’t hurt her nationally but I don’t think this will hurt her in SD or even an appointment in a Republican administration.  I’m sure she saw backlash from some, apparently not from folks like you and me, which is significant, but like I said, I appreciate the honesty.

[baddog]

Whatever happened to educating people so that they don’t go off the deep end pursuing an incident that shouldn’t be political in the first place? Seems everyone is looking for their “trigger”moment. The dumbing down of America has taken its toll. Anyone who would hold this against her is doing so out of spite and for political gain. Said people need to be ignored.

[bullets13]

For what it’s worth, there’s some talk that this incident is pretty well known about in SD and she was trying to get out in front of it. That story goes that  she just got pissed at the dog because it messed up her hunt and she was having trouble training it, and now she’s trying to spin it into something more justifiable.  There’s supposedly witnesses.  If that’s the case, it’s a whole other issue.  I’d sure like to hear from the family that owned the chickens the dog is supposed to have eaten at this point. 

[bullets13]

Also, multiple sources out of the trump camp are saying she has zero shot at the nomination now.  

[LumRaiderFan]

37 minutes ago, bullets13 said:

For what it’s worth, there’s some talk that this incident is pretty well known about in SD and she was trying to get out in front of it. That story goes that  she just got pissed at the dog because it messed up her hunt and she was having trouble training it, and now she’s trying to spin it into something more justifiable.  There’s supposedly witnesses.  If that’s the case, it’s a whole other issue.  I’d sure like to hear from the family that owned the chickens the dog is supposed to have eaten at this point. 

Like I said earlier, the democrats were sitting on this waiting for the right time.